Politicians Missed the Memo on Energy Efficiency

In the countless emails I receive about the US Energy Policy, EPA, Oil Industry, Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Waste, Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy-Solar and Wind, Clean Energy, Dirty Coal, Energy Industry and Political Ties, etc

There is one point that is being left out of the discussion.  Efficient Buildings use less Energy.  It does not matter if the Building is a Residential or Commercial Building.  If you add energy efficient improvements to your Structure you will save energy and your Utility Bills/Costs will be lower.

  • For Example: if your home has $300 of Utility Bills every month.  Energy Efficient measures for your Property will save you 10-40% per month or $30-$120 per month in Reduction on your Utility Costs.
  • When I talk with people about installing Solar Photovoltaic Systems to generate their own Clean Energy and how to reduce the over-all costs of a system.  I point out that: Energy Efficient Home Uses Less Electricity.  If a Home-Owner can reduce the Electrical needs for their property- a smaller photovoltaic system will be needed.  This reduction from energy needed translates to Thousands of Dollars-Scotty

So what is the big deal and why aren’t more people aware of this Avenue of Energy Saving Ideas?  I feel its mainly because of the Political Pay-Offs from Lobbying Organizations that our Elected Officials receive.  How can I assume these: Political Pay-Offs are influencing the Elected Officials?  The numbers don’t lie (here are stats on money received from lobbying organizations that are Politicians are receiving) The information is available for your personal re-search at:

  • OpenSecrets.org is your nonpartisan guide to money’s influence on U.S. elections and public policy. Whether you’re a voter, journalist, activist, student or interested citizen, use our free site to shine light on your government. Count cash and make change. 

Here are the Oil and Gas Lobbying Stats for the Entire USA.  To see how much money the Politicians receive for your Neighborhood use opensecrets.org

Oil and Gas

This industry, which includes multinational and independent oil and gas producers and refiners, natural gas pipeline companies, gasoline service stations and fuel oil dealers, has long enjoyed a history of strong influence in Washington. Individuals and political action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle, 75 percent of which has gone to Republicans.

Though former oilmen George W. Bush and Dick Cheney occupied the White House for eight years, the oil and gas industry could not win support for repealing bans on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. However, Congress voted in 2008 to lift a ban on offshore drilling. These companies are also wary of cap-and-trade climate change legislation, such as the measure Democratic President Barack Obama supports. Yet Obama still received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry during the 2008 campaign, more than any other lawmaker except his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). [Read more Background]


  • Top Contributors, 2009-2010

    Contributor Amount
    Koch Industries $1,931,562
    Exxon Mobil $1,337,058
    Chief Oil & Gas $1,192,361
    Chevron Corp $937,964
    Marathon Oil $678,290
    Valero Energy $636,500
    Occidental Petroleum $575,900
    Devon Energy $507,250
    Williams Companies $491,685
    Chesapeake Energy $467,056
    ConocoPhillips $462,204
    Independent Petroleum Assn of America $459,500
    Anadarko Petroleum $443,260
    American Gas Assn $386,400
    Halliburton Co $314,280
    Pilot Corp $290,567
    Tesoro Petroleum $277,883
    Society of Indep Gasoline Marketers $274,000
    Bass Brothers Enterprises $247,465
    Petroleum Marketers Assn $243,900
  • Top Lobbying Clients, 2010

    Client/Parent Total
    ConocoPhillips $19,626,382
    Chevron Corp $12,890,000
    Exxon Mobil $12,450,000
    Royal Dutch Shell $10,370,000
    Koch Industries $8,070,000
  • Top Recipients, 2009-2010

Candidate Office Amount
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) Senate $423,900
Vitter, David (R-LA) Senate $350,950
Blunt, Roy (R-MO) House $300,300
Murkowski, Lisa (I-AK) Senate $284,026
Portman, Rob (R-OH) $279,208
  • Election Cycle Rank† Total Contributions Contributions from Individuals Contributions from PACs Soft/Outside Money Donations to Democrats Donations to Republicans % to Dems % to Repubs
    2010 15 $27,982,434 $14,900,364 $11,262,563 $1,819,507 $5,972,533 $19,980,469 23% 77%
    2008 16 $36,057,054 $25,836,958 $10,100,704 $119,392 $8,193,715 $27,845,209 23% 77%
    2006 14 $20,651,556 $12,301,447 $8,283,109 $67,000 $3,695,486 $16,866,466 18% 82%
    2004 16 $26,149,039 $19,009,541 $7,114,248 $25,250 $5,105,150 $21,020,024 20% 80%
    2002 13 $25,097,266 $8,548,319 $6,450,281 $10,098,666 $5,042,530 $20,044,841 20% 80%
    2000 10 $34,383,697 $11,364,404 $6,928,043 $16,091,250 $7,059,356 $26,815,322 21% 79%
    1998 8 $21,631,044 $6,351,053 $6,767,892 $8,512,099 $5,044,405 $16,506,042 23% 77%
    1996 7 $26,071,855 $9,673,772 $6,539,583 $9,858,500 $5,968,180 $19,677,378 23% 77%
    1994 7 $17,760,108 $6,743,117 $6,492,029 $4,524,962 $6,663,777 $11,074,886 38% 62%
    1992 7 $20,544,645 $8,799,522 $6,462,523 $5,282,600 $6,912,722 $13,448,820 34% 66%
    1990 8 $10,930,603 $4,848,379 $6,082,224 $0 $4,171,365 $6,758,938 38% 62%
    Total 11 $267,277,036 $128,394,611 $82,483,199 $56,399,226 $63,830,019 $200,055,330 24% 76%
    These numbers show how the industry ranks in total campaign giving as compared to more than 80 other industries. Rankings are shown only for industries (such as the Automotive industry) — not for widely encompassing “sectors” (such as Transportation) or more detailed “categories” (like car dealers).
    METHODOLOGY: The numbers on this page are based on contributions of $200 or more from PACs and individuals to federal candidates and from PACs, soft money (including directly from corporate and union treasuries) and individual donors to political parties and outside spending groups, as reported to the Federal Election Commission. “Donations to Democrats,” “Donations to Republicans,” and the associated percentages are based solely on contributions to candidates and parties. Independent expenditures and electioneering communications are not reflected in the breakdown by party.” While election cycles are shown in charts as 1996, 1998, 2000 etc. they actually represent two-year periods. For example, the 2002 election cycle runs from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2002. 
    Data for the current election cycle were released by the Federal Election Commission on Monday, February 07, 2011.
    NOTE: Soft money contributions to the national parties were not publicly disclosed until the 1991-92 election cycle, and were banned by the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act following the 2002 elections. Contributions to Outside Spending groups legalized by the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision are listed in the “Soft/Outside Money” column as are donations of “Levin” funds to state and local party committees. Levin funds were created by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.

    Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.
    Join us on: Be our fan on FacebookFollow Us on Twitter

    With Leaders like this in Washington its no wonder the USA is in economic turmoil.


    Find Your Representatives-Republican or Democrat, and Let Your Voice BE HEARD! Active Participation is Suggested TellMyPolitician
     
Advertisements

Leave a Reply-Scotty will respond asap

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s